top of page

By:

Bhalchandra Chorghade

11 August 2025 at 1:54:18 pm

Infrastructure moment in MMR

Mumbai: The Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR) stands at a critical inflection point as the Mahayuti alliance secured near-complete control over key municipal corporations across the region. With aligned political leadership at the state and civic levels, the long-fragmented governance architecture of India’s most complex urban agglomeration may finally see greater coherence in planning and execution. For a region grappling with mobility stress, water insecurity and uneven urban expansion, the...

Infrastructure moment in MMR

Mumbai: The Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR) stands at a critical inflection point as the Mahayuti alliance secured near-complete control over key municipal corporations across the region. With aligned political leadership at the state and civic levels, the long-fragmented governance architecture of India’s most complex urban agglomeration may finally see greater coherence in planning and execution. For a region grappling with mobility stress, water insecurity and uneven urban expansion, the question now is not what to build—but how quickly and seamlessly projects can be delivered. Urban mobility remains the backbone of MMR’s infrastructure agenda. Several metro corridors are at advanced stages, including the Andheri West–Vikhroli Metro Line 6 and extensions of the Colaba–Bandra–SEEPZ Metro Line 3. While construction has progressed steadily, coordination issues with municipal agencies—particularly related to road restoration, utilities shifting and traffic management—have often slowed execution. With elected civic bodies now politically aligned with the state government and agencies like MMRDA and MMRC, these bottlenecks are expected to ease. Decision-making on road closures, permissions for casting yards and last-mile integration with buses and footpaths could see faster turnarounds. Suburban rail projects such as the Panvel–Karjat corridor and additional railway lines on the Central and Western routes are also likely to benefit from smoother land acquisition and rehabilitation approvals, traditionally the most contentious municipal functions. Regional Connectivity MMR’s road infrastructure has expanded rapidly in recent years, but execution has often been uneven across municipal boundaries. Projects such as the Mumbai Coastal Road, the Goregaon–Mulund Link Road, the Thane–Borivali tunnel and the Airoli–Katai connector have regional significance but require constant coordination with local bodies for utilities, encroachments and traffic planning. Under a unified civic dispensation, authorities expect fewer inter-agency delays and greater willingness at the municipal level to prioritise regionally critical projects over hyper-local political considerations. The next phase of the Coastal Road, suburban creek bridges, and arterial road widening projects in fast-growing nodes like Vasai-Virar, Kalyan-Dombivli and Panvel could be streamlined as municipal corporations align their development plans with state transport objectives. Water Security Water supply remains one of the most politically sensitive infrastructure issues in MMR, particularly in peripheral urban zones. Projects such as the Surya Regional Water Supply Scheme and proposed dam developments in the Karjat region are designed to address chronic shortages in Mira-Bhayandar, Vasai-Virar and parts of Navi Mumbai. While these projects are state-driven, municipal cooperation is critical for distribution networks, billing systems and sewerage integration. With elected bodies replacing administrators, local governments are expected to accelerate last-mile pipelines, treatment plants and sewage networks that often lag behind bulk water infrastructure. Unified political control may also reduce resistance to tariff rationalisation and long-delayed sewage treatment upgrades mandated under environmental norms. Housing Integration One area where political alignment could have an outsized impact is redevelopment—particularly slum rehabilitation and transit-oriented development. Many large housing projects have stalled due to disputes between civic officials, state agencies and local political interests. A cohesive governance structure could fast-track approvals for cluster redevelopment near metro corridors, unlocking both housing supply and ridership potential. Municipal corporations are also likely to align their development control regulations more closely with state urban policy, enabling higher density near transport nodes and more predictable redevelopment timelines. This could be transformative for older suburbs and industrial belts awaiting regeneration. The return of elected municipal councils after years of administrative rule introduces political accountability but also sharper alignment with state priorities. Budget approvals, tendering processes and policy decisions that earlier faced delays due to political uncertainty are expected to move faster. Capital expenditure plans could increasingly reflect regional priorities rather than fragmented ward-level demands. However, challenges remain. Faster execution will depend not only on political control but on institutional capacity, contractor performance and financial discipline. Public scrutiny is also likely to intensify as elected representatives seek visible results within fixed tenures.

The Last Sovereign

At 90, the Dalai Lama is confronting the future of his reincarnation with resolve and without deference to Beijing.

On July 2, in the Indian hill town of Dharamshala, where he has lived in exile since 1959, the 14th Dalai Lama made an announcement that echoed far beyond the confines of the Buddhist world. “The institution of the Dalai Lama will continue,” he said, adding that the GadenPhodrang Trust - the body headquartered in his own office - would be the “sole authority” to recognise his reincarnation. “No one else has any… authority to interfere in this matter,” he added, in a pointed rebuke to the Chinese Communist Party, which claims precisely that authority.


It was the latest salvo in a long struggle over who controls the soul of Tibet. At stake is the fate of a people whose cultural identity has been under relentless siege.


There was a time when such words might have sounded obvious. But for Tibetan Buddhism in the 21st century, reincarnation has become a battleground. In 2007, the Chinese Communist Party issued an edict asserting that all ‘living Buddhas’ must receive state approval before reincarnating. The idea that a Marxist-Leninist regime would reserve the right to control the rebirth of souls might seem absurd were it not so chillingly consistent.


The Dalai Lama’s statement, issued just days before his 90th birthday, was not new in substance. He had said much the same in 2011. But the timing and the context - his advancing age and Beijing’s renewed assertiveness in Tibetan affairs - give it fresh urgency.


The reincarnation of a Dalai Lama has always been a matter of deep ritual and Tibetan consensus. The process stretches back to the 15th century, when the first Dalai Lama was posthumously recognised as a reincarnation. Since then, the line has been both a spiritual and temporal authority. From the 17th century until 1951, when Tibet was annexed by China, successive Dalai Lamas ruled as de facto sovereigns from Lhasa.


Born in 1935 in the village of Taktser, in what is now Qinghai province, Lhamo Thondup was recognised at age two as the reincarnation of the 13th Dalai Lama. He was enthroned in Lhasa in 1940 and assumed full temporal power at the age of fifteen, just as Mao Zedong’s People’s Liberation Army was consolidating its grip over Tibet. In 1959, amid the chaos of a failed uprising, the young Dalai Lama slipped out of Lhasa disguised as a soldier and fled across the Himalayas into India. He has never returned, presiding instead over a government-in-exile from Dharamshala. Over the decades, he has transformed his role from that of a traditional theocrat to a modern statesman advocating non-violence, religious harmony and ‘secular ethics’ in a world riddled with conflict and consumerism.


It is precisely this moral authority that the Chinese Communist Party fears. For Beijing, the Dalai Lama is a symbol of Tibetan resistance. That is why China insists it alone can select the 15th Dalai Lama.


In 1995, after the Dalai Lama recognised a six-year-old boy as the reincarnation of the Panchen Lama (the second-highest figure in Tibetan Buddhism) Chinese authorities abducted the child and installed their own alternative. The original Panchen Lama, now in his thirties, has never been seen again.


The Dalai Lama’s vision for what comes after him rests with the GadenPhodrang Trust. Founded in 2011 and headed by Samdhong Rinpoche, a soft-spoken scholar-monk and former prime minister of the Tibetan government-in-exile, the Trust will oversee the search and recognition of his reincarnation, should the institution continue. Two other affiliated bodies - the Dalai Lama Trust in Delhi and the GadenPhodrang Foundation in Zurich - support his broader mission of education, humanitarian work and global spiritual dialogue.


That looming scenario of rival Dalai Lamas, one chosen by Tibetan lamas, the other by Beijing’s bureaucrats, threatens to split the Tibetan community and further dilute international attention. It is also, paradoxically, a sign of how potent the institution remains. No government engineers the succession of a figure it deems irrelevant.


The Dalai Lama remains an eternal paradox in motion. A monk who once ruled a country. A refugee who became a Nobel laureate. And now, a nonagenarian who is preparing his people for a future in which his voice may no longer be audible but his choices and his warnings may shape Tibetan destiny for generations.

Comments

bottom of page